(CNN) – When I heard a federal judge struck down part of Utah’s polygamy law last week, I gave a little squeal of delight.

To be clear, I'm an Episcopal priest, not a polygamist. But I've met the family who brought the suit, and these people changed how I think about plural marriage.

Before I met the Browns – made famous by the reality television show “Sister Wives” – I had the kind of reaction most modern-day Christians would have to their lifestyle: Polygamy hurts women. It offers girls a skewed perspective of who they can be. It happens on cultish compounds. It’s abusive.

Yet when the Browns' show debuted, I began to question some of those assumptions, and when I had the opportunity to meet them a few years ago, I questioned them further.

In getting to know Kody, Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn, and their children, I saw that these parents were extremely invested in raising girls and boys who were empowered to get an education, become independent thinkers and have a moral compass.

Indeed, children were so important to them not because they wanted to create more young polygamists – the Browns want their children to choose their own beliefs – but because their children were the people who would join them in heaven, and they wanted to raise a family kind enough, good enough, to achieve that goal.

The result is four parents equally invested in their children, and a gaggle of young people who are neither spoiled nor timid, entitled nor brainwashed.

The result is also four parents who strive to model what being empowered people of faith looks like in contemporary America.

Since meeting the Browns, I have become a supporter of them and their lifestyle, though I certainly can understand why others remain opposed.

So much negative publicity has been generated – and rightly so – by fundamentalist Mormon Warren Jeffs and his followers that it leaves little room in the American imagination to think that polygamy could be something different.

When I talk about the Browns with my friends and colleagues, most are opposed to my position, believing that the women could not possibly be respected, that the children could not possibly receive the attention they deserve.

But it’s crucial to remember that, when done well, polygamy works because the participants have a different goal for marriage than monogamous couples: Most Americans believe that marriage is for the purpose of cultivating intimacy between two people, both sexual and emotional.

But for the Browns that takes a distant second to the goal of cultivating a community that together can reach heaven. It’s a different way of thinking about marriage and family, but it’s not inherently an abusive one.

Ultimately, I support the decision to loosen restrictions on polygamy because families such as the Browns exist who endeavor every day to live kind, healthy lives that are not harmful, not abusive.

I also believe there are theoretical reasons why, as a Christian, it makes sense to support healthy polygamous practices. It’s a natural extension for those Christians who support same-sex marriage on theological grounds. But even for those opposed to same-sex marriage, polygamy is documented in the Bible, thereby giving its existence warrant.

Some might say that supporting polygamy means supporting the abuse of women. But saying that it is OK for Christians to support plural marriage is not the same as saying that they should condone its abusive practices. Indeed, Christians should not, and cannot, do this.

It does mean, though, that there is room for Christians to support the right of consenting adults to make choices about marriage that align with their religious beliefs in a country that prides itself on religious freedom.

Through their television show, the Browns helped America learn that polygamists are just like the rest of us – they dress like us, go to public school like us, eat at Olive Garden like us – they just have more people committed to one another than the rest of our families do.

Finally, like us, they want to practice their faith. And as long as that practice is in the service of cultivating loving, healthy relationships that strive to honor God and neighbor, I believe it is possible for even nonpolygamous Christians such as myself to support their calling.

soundoff(1,215 Responses)

jonathanlk

Most people are very susceptible to get sucked into believing or going along with almost anything, at first. Like wet cement, once your beliefs set, no matter how far out or outlandish, they are pretty hard set. There are also those who have beliefs and are tired of them and out of curiosity, explore many of the weird alternatives, but you could get in trouble if you only use faith based reasoning. Make sure to mix in a little logic for balance. I suspect the author is merely discovering that there is the possibility that she, a mere humble priestess of a legal church sect that allows women to preach and marry, might be be able to move to a polygamist state, and marry a couple dozen studs and get away with it, legally. Think, handy man, pool boy, butler, chief butler, cook, electrician, plumber, lover, driver, tailor, entertainer, lawn mower, bi-make up artist, shoemaker, stud of the hour, backup dirver.... back up lawn mower.... all free. Just need a big house and a lot of eligible, non alpha-male, men who don't have an emotional need for being 'the only one'.

June 18, 2014 at 3:25 pm |

kfurgeson

No one should have to "learn" to love their relationship. Especially when that relationship entails marriage.

II
My name is Emil Kaiypov. I am a citizen of the Kyrgyz Republic, a lawyer, and a father of two children. The proposal for which I am asking your kind support is the suspension of all currently existing hostilities on Earth.

The main goal of my entire project is to save and improve the lives of children who are suffering from the present conflicts and violence.

The challenge is to create a moment of "pause" [a technical term from video language] in hostilities now and in the future, as well as to refusal to restart them at all. I believe that in this context, such "pause" in the war action seems do-able and practical, much more effective than the idealistic and utopian pressing of an imaginary "stop" button. In the future the first action will equate to the second: "pause" will become "stop". In order to alert the international community and potential supporters, I made a demonstration of my own at 18 October 2013 on the territory of Syrian embassy in Beirut, with poster "pause the war".

The purpose of this demonstration, is to show through an example that:

1) one person has the power to perform an action directed to the benefit of all mankind.

2) no one should be indifferent, when war is concerned.

3) war requires us to drop everything else, in order to stop it. Daily activities, against the background of war, look meaningless and empty.

I believe, that this idea will resonate and supporters will wish to join it. The age of information technologies, will help to spread it around the globe. Definitely there will be supporters among the world's famous celebrities. In the event that a large number of ordinary people and celebrities join this campaign, the dream to stop all military actions on the planet will be realized. This will serve as an occasion to announce the call for volunteers in the "international army of peace". It will consist of unarmed "soldiers" who are ready at any time, to go to the hot spot to "pause" the hostilities with the fact of their presence and to encourage the warring parties to engage in dialogue. Ideally, this army should consist of a world-famous and beloved celebrities from all spheres of human activities.

I suggest that countries be ready to support my initiative, in solidarity, by placing on the cloth of their national flags, the well-known pause symbol "II". I believe that in the course of implementation of this anti-war action, the reasons for which the suspended armed conflict began, will be resolved or continued in a civilized manner. This anti-war action will bring about a new peaceful reality, when there will be no state left, which "international army of peace" had not visited.

The termination of all hostilities, will become the point of departure for further continuous progress in all directions.

We are able to bring about the time, when the world will be fairly managed by a workable international organization which will be trusted by all citizens of the earth. When this happens, all kinds of weapons will be transferred to international United Nations control, the purpose of which, will be the preservation of peace and sustainable development of mankind.

We live in a world, when the collective effort makes possible the colonizing of other planets in the foreseeable future. I believe, that we have enough strength and resources for the child born tomorrow to see a world, where uniform international standards of education, labor, pension and medical care, will be established everywhere. A world, where the primary human needs will be satisfied for free.

A world, where nobody talks about freedom, because absolute freedom will accompany each person from the moment of birth, to his last breath. A world, where the happiness and freedom of the individual, will not happen in isolation but will include freedom and happiness of all of humanity. A world without war.

A world without war is undisputed goal, that sooner or later humanity will definitely reach. It is the primary duty of every adult to fulfill a "world in peace"– everyone’s childhood dream. Every child surrounded by the horrors of war dreams that one day somebody will come and say "It is enough!" and by saying it bring war to an end. Then war will stop. That day has come! It's time to combine our efforts in order to make that dream come true.﻿
_______________________________________________________pause the WAR

Oka. Who is the maytron and who are the midwives or subordinates? I honestly do not like the concept of polygamy.

March 3, 2014 at 2:17 am |

Toni Hopkins

Let's pretend that polygamy was the norm. Historically, the man would support the family, and the wives would stay home and have the babies, right? Well, the ones we see on TV, the women are working and the men are off having fun! The babies continue to come, and the women more and more talk about how jealous they are and how they need to live apart in their own space to stay sane, and have their independence. That is not the historical picture of the practice. Also, if one man was allowed to have however many wives he wants, and all those children, where would the new blood come from? If a town had 50 people, all from the same man, where would his children get their mates from? A society could not sustain such a practice, and it is morally reprehensible to our Creator. In the beginning, their was one woman created from the rib of one man, whose relationship was blessed by God. Other relationships came along, but were not intended by our Creator, and they popped up after the fall from perfection, and after their having been kicked out Eden.

February 4, 2014 at 1:08 pm |

Jen

...and it is morally reprehensible to our Creator."
Really? Did He tell you that Himself? If so, He's clearly changed his mind since Rachael and Leah both married Jacob, to say nothing of Solomon and his 500 – or was it 700? wives.
In real life, ie, in Islamic countries where a man can have up to four wives, most men only have one. Wives are expensive. The men who do have more than one, generally have only two, and only a very few, very rich men have more than two. So there's really nothing to worry about, genetically speaking.

February 7, 2014 at 6:48 pm |

joe

But for the Browns that takes a distant second to the goal of cultivating a community that together can reach heaven.
-------
Such absurd notions. If there is a God, it's all powerful and all knowledgeable. An all powerful and all knowledgeable God has everything it wants–by definition of being all powerful and all knowledgeable.

It wouldn't "want" or "need" anything and certainly not Its upright monkeys reaching heaven.

February 4, 2014 at 6:23 am |

momofthree

Well, the data contradict the Browns on every score: http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/05/5338/

January 20, 2014 at 12:50 pm |

Modern Christian

So many thoughtful, bull**** posts.
Kody Brown wants what every man wants: as many opportunities to pass on his genes as possible. He certainly has qualities that appeal to his wives, and they are happy to let him be a "father to his nation".
Every one of us knows that in our heart of hearts, and delude ourselves if we choose to ignore that truth that goes all the way to the brainstem.

January 17, 2014 at 12:08 am |

Matthew Mueller

The goal of a marriage is simple. To do our best to represent Christ's relationship with His bride the Church here on Earth, and, if kids are involved, to do our best to be good representations of Our Father in heaven. Period. End of story. You can't do that with multiple wives, or for that matter multiple husbands.

A Man shall leave his mother and father and be cleaved unto his wife and they will become one flesh. Not wives, plural. Wife singular.

January 15, 2014 at 5:21 pm |

Melissa

If that is true why does civil marriage exist. I can promise you, my marriage has nothing to do with Jesus or any other sky-friend.

January 21, 2014 at 5:10 am |

Keith

neither does mine. My relationship is 45 years on-going and it has changed many times during that time and at no time did it have anything to do with Jesus

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.